easy to introduce discrete bodies and special constraints. A very attractive 

 feature is that the coding is insensitive to the geometric complexity. To be 

 sure, more nodes and elements means more computation cost, but the method is 

 insensitive to the degree of interconnection, multiplicity of materials and 

 the irregularity of the geometry and boundary conditions. 



A very strong feature of the stiffness method is the ability to develop 

 the governing discrete equations directly for a variety of solution forms. 

 Since it works with the governing equations from mechanics, it is as easy to 

 get the incremental equation form as it is to get the total response equations. 

 Frequency domain or time domain forms may be chosen. This is of particular 

 value in large displacement solutions where dynamic effects occur relative to 

 some static preloaded state. This allows the static and dynamic analyses to be 

 done using consistent models. This is of very specific value in mooring 

 analys is . 



Two very real problems with the use of the finite element method deserve 

 mention. First is the fact that this approach (like most discrete methods) 

 tends to produce large order simultaneous coupled equations, and solution 

 of these equations can be expensive. Often the novice code user will tend 

 to "shot gun" the problem with many nodes, many design perturbations and many 

 debug runs. Cost may not be a dominant factor if there is no other way and the 

 answer must be had; however, one tends to vault from very crude models to 

 excessively complex models with little thought about what is in between. Once 

 the ability to analyze is given, one may tend to over- analyze or expect far 

 too much from the analysis. The second problem is related to the first. When 

 a very complicated problem is solved on the computer, the input generation is 



29 



